David Kahn wrote in post #968911: > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Marnen Laibow-Koser > <li...@ruby-forum.com>wrote: > >> >> >> value.should == 3 >> I assure you, it is necessary. The assert_ syntax of Test::Unit lends >> I just looked up Shoulda's documentation to see the differences. I >> better designed one. That means RSpec. >> > >> > And where would I learn about them? Perhaps I missed it but even in the > Rspec book I dont see any mention of such coolness.
Learn about what coolness? It's not clear from your quotation. > I know I can use > shoulda > with rspec and get its helpers but if you know some specifics that Rspec > does this as concisely --- like validation and associations if you can > point > me in the right direction I would appreciate it... RSpec doesn't have the canned validation and association matchers that Shoulda does, but they're pretty easy to write for yourself if you want to. Some of my stuff on Github should give you ideas...reflect_on_association is *very* useful. > that way I will > forget > about shoulda. Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org mar...@marnen.org -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-t...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
